AI Can’t Adulterate its Own Writing

My friend John Gruber is incensed by the idea that AI watermarking schemes adjust the output of a given LLM so that the output can later be assessed as likely coming from that particular LLM: They say “imperceptible” and “doesn’t change the meaning, quality, or readability”. Their words. Not almost imperceptible. Not slightly changes the meaning, quality, or readability. That made sense to me, because that’s absolutely what I want — nay, demand — from any tools I use personally. I can understand why Gruber, a nearly-lifetime professional writer, would balk at the idea that the words in a given stretch of prose might be altered to satisfy such an unpoetic goal as watermarking. But to be offended by “the perversion of writing” you need actual writing to pervert. Even if you grant that whatever pops out of an LLM is “writing”, a watermarking process would have to take place after the writing was complete for any treachery to occur. I don’t claim to be an expert about AI or the…